Need Affirmative?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you think the term the AO used was "need-aware"? Because that's the term they use, not "need-affirmative".

OP here, I'm aware of what "need aware" means, and the AO I was referring to definitely used the phrase "need affirmative." It was followed by a statement to the effect that if you had a high level of financial need, that would work in your favor in the admissions process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At a visit at one of the WASP schools last spring, the AO giving the info session mentioned that they were "need affirmative," suggesting that applicants with high financial need were given a boost in the admissions process. Does anyone have information or experience about this? I don't see how it would work if the school is, as they claim to be, "need blind," as they wouldn't even know who has high financial need. But maybe their version of "need blind" means that need won't hurt you, but it can help you.

I work in this space and can confirm that some formerly need-blind schools are turning to these policies in an effort to ensure continued socioeconomic diversity post-SFFA. As a technical matter, this approach isn’t “need-blind,” so if they described themselves as “need-affirmative,” you probably won’t find “need-blind” on their website anymore. And these schools are avoiding the term “need-aware” because of its connotation of favoring wealthy students.

Pell eligibility is often the marker these schools use to implement this policy; they’ll set a goal of increasing the percentage of Pell eligible students and use this factor in admissions.

DP. Pell is specifically considered as it is a significant factor in the US News ranking calculation.

[Anonymous]

I understand that there are multiple reasons to be "need-affirmative." However, need-blind and need-affirmative are incongruent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At a visit at one of the WASP schools last spring, the AO giving the info session mentioned that they were "need affirmative," suggesting that applicants with high financial need were given a boost in the admissions process. Does anyone have information or experience about this? I don't see how it would work if the school is, as they claim to be, "need blind," as they wouldn't even know who has high financial need. But maybe their version of "need blind" means that need won't hurt you, but it can help you.

All of WASP claim to be need blind. Why not identify the school?

If schools aren't actually need-blind, they should own it.

[Anonymous]

All of the WASP are need blind (at least for domestic students) so how do they know if a kid is Pell eligible? Aren’t the financial aid offices separate from admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of the WASP are need blind (at least for domestic students) so how do they know if a kid is Pell eligible? Aren’t the financial aid offices separate from admissions?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Logically, if someone has high need, they probably didn't have the resources, quality of education, support, or opportunities that applicants from rich families did. The child of lawyers in McLean shouldn't be judged by the same academic standards as the child of a single mother who never attended college from Anacostia. E.g., someone from that background who has a 1400 SAT score and a 3 on a few APs will probably do much better in college than the lawyer's kid with a 1550 and 5s on a dozen APs.

Why do you think that? I don't disagree that the child of a single mother who never attended college from Anacostia but scores a 1400 SAT and a 3 on a few APs is most likely a good student who will be successful, you also can't deny that odds are their elementary/middle/high school would not be as good as one the lawyers child went to in McLean. There is also the chance they may not have received the rigorous background others did.

Did you miss the recent story about a huge number of students at one of the UC colleges who were placed in remedial math classes because they lacked the skills?

Do you really think those remedial math classes are full of UMC white/Asian students who come from homes where both parents are college educated professionals, attended good schools in the suburbs, had tutors and every resources at their disposal ready to help them while growing up? And the "poor" kids without all those resources growing up are the ones who don't need the remedial math classes/will just do better in college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At a visit at one of the WASP schools last spring, the AO giving the info session mentioned that they were "need affirmative," suggesting that applicants with high financial need were given a boost in the admissions process. Does anyone have information or experience about this? I don't see how it would work if the school is, as they claim to be, "need blind," as they wouldn't even know who has high financial need. But maybe their version of "need blind" means that need won't hurt you, but it can help you.

Someone is lying or misunderstanding. The question is "who?"

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/07/24/upshot/ivy-league-elite-college-admissions.html


"
Some colleges are already doing what they call “need-affirmative admissions,” for the purpose of selecting more students from the low end of the income spectrum, though they often don’t publicly acknowledge it for fear of blowback.

There is a tool, Landscape from the College Board, to help determine if an applicant grew up in a neighborhood with significant privilege or adversity. But these colleges have no knowledge of parents’ income if students don’t apply for financial aid.
"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Logically, if someone has high need, they probably didn't have the resources, quality of education, support, or opportunities that applicants from rich families did. The child of lawyers in McLean shouldn't be judged by the same academic standards as the child of a single mother who never attended college from Anacostia. E.g., someone from that background who has a 1400 SAT score and a 3 on a few APs will probably do much better in college than the lawyer's kid with a 1550 and 5s on a dozen APs.

The actual data shows that SAT scores predict the same across SES. In other words, on average, a rich kid who scores a 1400 performs the same as a poor kid that scores a 1400.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Logically, if someone has high need, they probably didn't have the resources, quality of education, support, or opportunities that applicants from rich families did. The child of lawyers in McLean shouldn't be judged by the same academic standards as the child of a single mother who never attended college from Anacostia. E.g., someone from that background who has a 1400 SAT score and a 3 on a few APs will probably do much better in college than the lawyer's kid with a 1550 and 5s on a dozen APs.

The actual data shows that SAT scores predict the same across SES. In other words, on average, a rich kid who scores a 1400 performs the same as a poor kid that scores a 1400.

Predict the same *what*?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Affirmative-action for need?

How is that insulated from race?

Why would it need to be insulated from race? They can’t use fake proxies but they can have real institutional priorities that tend to favor one race over another. Otherwise no school could consider test scores.

I am against extremely against racial affirmative action but if a school wants to prioritize underprivileged kids, the correlation between race and poverty does not prohibit the consideration of economic status. If the REASO)N they are doing it is to achieve diversity, then I am less sanguine about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Affirmative-action for need?

How is that insulated from race?

Do you really think specific racial minorities are the only low-income people out there??

Seriously, race is a protected class, which is why schools can not discriminate on that basis.

Income level is not a protected class. Schools can choose to prioritize whatever income level or economic status they wish.

They just can't use income level or need as a vehicle for selecting one race over another. Assessing need should be race-blind or the numbers somehow should show even-handness (or at least not a hard skew) on the variable of race within a particular income group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At a visit at one of the WASP schools last spring, the AO giving the info session mentioned that they were "need affirmative," suggesting that applicants with high financial need were given a boost in the admissions process. Does anyone have information or experience about this? I don't see how it would work if the school is, as they claim to be, "need blind," as they wouldn't even know who has high financial need. But maybe their version of "need blind" means that need won't hurt you, but it can help you.

Someone is lying or misunderstanding. The question is "who?"

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/07/24/upshot/ivy-league-elite-college-admissions.html


"
Some colleges are already doing what they call “need-affirmative admissions,” for the purpose of selecting more students from the low end of the income spectrum, though they often don’t publicly acknowledge it for fear of blowback.

There is a tool, Landscape from the College Board, to help determine if an applicant grew up in a neighborhood with significant privilege or adversity. But these colleges have no knowledge of parents’ income if students don’t apply for financial aid.
"

This is how we wind up with the barbell effect.

These schools are now eager to provide opportunities for high-performing low-income students, but then they need to fund it with full-pay students and big donor families. Families and kids in the middle no longer meet institutional needs.

I'm wondering what it means for campus life. Do kids at these schools feel a big divide between the haves and the have-nots?

[Anonymous]

This is the LI of FG/LI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At a visit at one of the WASP schools last spring, the AO giving the info session mentioned that they were "need affirmative," suggesting that applicants with high financial need were given a boost in the admissions process. Does anyone have information or experience about this? I don't see how it would work if the school is, as they claim to be, "need blind," as they wouldn't even know who has high financial need. But maybe their version of "need blind" means that need won't hurt you, but it can help you.

Someone is lying or misunderstanding. The question is "who?"

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/07/24/upshot/ivy-league-elite-college-admissions.html


"
Some colleges are already doing what they call “need-affirmative admissions,” for the purpose of selecting more students from the low end of the income spectrum, though they often don’t publicly acknowledge it for fear of blowback.

There is a tool, Landscape from the College Board, to help determine if an applicant grew up in a neighborhood with significant privilege or adversity. But these colleges have no knowledge of parents’ income if students don’t apply for financial aid.
"

.

I'm wondering what it means for campus life. Do kids at these schools feel a big divide between the haves and the have-nots?

Always has been that way